BBC to bring the famous five to TV

[Dinopawus]

Just seen this in the Times.

For the love of Timmy, can the BBC please leave George as the Tom-boy she is?

Im not confident.

Famous Five go on a progressive adventure for new generation in TV adaptation

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/25335ec2-1388-11ee-b768-bb6d328f2d92?shareToken=8042c7bc7e8225df45e0537407fb335a

Don’t hold out much hope.

That was my first thought, too!

I think George being trans males a lot more sense than Joan of Arc, to be fair.

Makes, not makes.

But she wasn't trans. She just wanted a version of girlhood that was not stuck in poor Anne's 'I embrace my servitude and am everybody's little mummy' groove. Julian was no less stuck in another stereotypical groove.

”a diverse range of children will star in the four main roles”

The children were quite obviously written as white, middle class and were all related, three of them siblings. Why not create a different story if you want to jam in diversity?

Then again, perhaps Timmy will be a trans dog and will go to school, but only whine and bark occasionally, when asked questions in class.

George is a tom-boy, one of my first heroes. I'm really looking forward to seeing the role played by a strong woman.

Mallory Towers did OK with its diversity although I could have done without the stable boy to be honest. There was no need to cram a boy in - it's a girls school.

Both my dc absolutely loved Enid Blyton books but sometimes when I was reading them as a bedtime story I'd change the description of some characters so that at least there was the opportunity for them to imagine up someone in the story that looked like them. Just by saying 'her black hair' or 'flashing brown eyes' instead of what was written.

Malory Towers managed Bill being an old fashioned Tomboy fine... so maybe they will manage it?

I loved the books and tv series as a child. It was of it's time and if they're going to fart about with it, what's the point?
If the original idea isn't diverse enough for today's kids, something new should be written and produced instead.
Box ticking at it's best.

Exactly. My blood is already boiling at the thought of them making George anything but a tomboy.

Even as a child I could see that George was reacting to the sexist expectations that being a girl meant being meek and domesticated like Anne.
She wanted to be bold, wild, active and her way of expressing that was to say she wanted to be a boy. No- one thought that actually meant she was a boy. Just that she didn’t want to be praised for being “a good little housekeeper” in the way Anne was.

By "diverse," do they mean ethnically diverse?

I feel like, either retain the 50s setting and the original cast in all their whiteness, or write an updated version if you want a more ethnically diverse cast (or just use the "kids on an adventure" theme to write completely different adventure stories?)

1950s was, quite honestly, overwhelmingly white and it certain wasn't color-blind; if you have a bunch of multi-ethnicity kids wandering around the British countryside c. 1950, people would have noticed and commented and said things. If non-white characters are handled in this kind of color-blind way, it pretty much amounts to lying about the past.

Good old Anne being the perfect little wife, LOL.

Does anyone remember "Five Go Mad in Dorset" from "Ripping Yarns"? They had Anne wandering around with a big feather duster at the campsite, dusting the grass and trees: "No, I don't mind being dominated, because at least I'm quiet and pretty, not like poor George" !!

They've done TV adaptations before, do we need yet another?

I'll keep an open mind until I see it. When it comes to these stories, they are of their time and I would rather see TV adaptations reflecting that. We now live in a time where society is more diverse so books written now can reflect that. It's still ok for older texts to stay true to the context in which they were written.

I do really enjoy the Malory Towers adaptations but the racial diversity does grate a little because we know for a fact that Malory Towers wouldn't have been like that. You can ignore it because it doesn't really affect the story. It probably would feel weird if we suddenly had a black Dick or a Korean Julian though as they're meant to be siblings. I don't think international, or even interracial, adoption was a thing in 1940s Cornwall.

The word 'progressive' is a big red flag in this context. One step away from 'queering'.

I think the problem is that we're essentially seeing the collision of two trends here. On the one hand, media content seems to be becoming increasingly risk-averse and derivative; everything has to be based on a book or comic book or a sodding remake of something that was made before. On the other hand, there is pressure to have more non-white characters in TV and films.

The inevitable and awkward solution to this dilemma is "OK, let's make yet ANOTHER remake of Henry VIII/Jane Austen/Famous Five (for the millionth time) but just crayon a few characters in as being different colors. Yay, that's that diversity box ticked!"

I'd rather see more original content from more diverse parts of the world featuring more diverse actors, but that would demand some originality and appetite for risk-taking.

If George isn't non-binary, I'll eat my hat!

I can't get on with colour / sex blind casting in TV and film but I do appreciate the need to give jobs to a diverse range of actors. I think it works fine on stage where you aren't looking for realism.

I just saw julius Caesar with female Brutus and Cassius. It made Shakespeare more interesting.

Mind you 80 days around the world was good despite diverse casting.

I can't see that famous five is worth messing with. You either do it as it was or you do a completely different story that fits the modern world.

So many good books that could benefit from a lavish bbc budget.

When I read the books to my sons we often end up on a little digression about what a prick Julian is

my first thought when I saw this thread was ‘oh no’

please don’t trans George

Is it beyond their wit to make a children's series about five (or whatever number) children having adventures with their pet?

It doesn't need to be the Famous Five. Just take the core concept and run with it.

Those books were popular because of the formula and adventure, not because of the stereotypes - sex, class, race, you name it.

It's stupid to call it an adaptation - just pay some bloody writers to come up with good new content, and don't hog tie them with 70 odd year old stories that don't need retold (again).

I agree. I don't think a black Anne Boleyn is appropriate and I'd love to see original programmes about African or Chinese women for instance.

Five Go Mad in Dorset was Comic Strip. Jennifer Saunders was Anne and Dawn French was George.

I remember watching a kids' TV series in the 70s

The Famous Five helped to make me a feminist at a very young age. Of course George, and all girls, should be able to do whatever boys do. And Julian was so bossy and Anne was so wet but Dick was sweet. And it was so racist and classist but despite recognising that Enid Blyton was horrible about poor people and foreigners I still read them all. Didn't read any to my daughter though.

FF books are period pieces, updating and making them diverse is really not going to work - it's 3 siblings and a cousin, and they don't have any other friends. I fear George will be a 'them', which nicely avoids challenging gender norms.